Scott Mead wrote: > Don't do it. Period. I've used 4 big-vendor appliances with NFS as well as > my own server. With > maybe 3 exceptions, most of the 'total-data-loss' scenarios I've dealt with > regarding transactional > data was due to NFS.
Can you share more details? What happened and what had caused the problem? While researching the same topic, I came across two scenarios where people had encountered problems: 1) A background mounted NFS failed to mount in time. A smart startup script triggered initdb on the empty mount point, then while PostgreSQL was running, the mount completed and data corruption ensued. 2) The NFS server implementation didn't actually sync the data (or keep it in a battery powered buffer) when it said it had synced them. It would be good to know of other pitfalls; I (and no doubt not only I) keep getting asked why we shouldn't run PostgreSQL on NFS when Oracle has no problem with it (and don't tell me that Oracle does not care about data corruption). Yours, Laurenz Albe -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
